Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action regarding Application No. 18/180,113 to Jin et al., assigned to CALB Group Co., Ltd., Jiangsu, China, filed 03/07/2023 and published on 03/21/2024 as U.S. PG Publication 2024/0097258A1, is in response to applicants’ arguments/ remarks, and claims amendment filed 12/26/2025, and also to information disclosure statement, IDS, filed 03/11/2026.
Status of the Claims
In the response filed 12/26/2025 applicant has amended claim 1 by adding the limitation wherein the lifting column is embedded in the side wall Applicant has canceled claim 11, which recited a battery pack. The status of the claims stand as follows:
Currently amended 1
Original 2-10
3.3 Canceled 11
Claims 1-10 are currently pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/11/2026 has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered by the examiner. A duly initialed and signed copy is attached herewith. Accordingly, information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed by Examiner.
Partial Withdrawal of Objection to the Drawing
The drawing was objected for failing to show the side wall, the fixed sealing block , and the battery pack.
Regarding the objection to the drawing of the side wall applicant argues that the specification in paragraph [0030] describes “…The side wall provided in the embodiments of the disclosure is provided with a lifting column 111, and the lifting column 111 is integrally formed with the side wall and is embedded in the side wall. When the lifting column 111 is arranged, the side wall where the lifting column 111 can be arranged can be the side beam 11 of the box body 10” (Remarks page 6).The Applicant then argues one in the art would recognize the claimed element "side wall" being corresponding to the side beam 11 in the description.” (Remarks page 6).
The disclosure cited in paragraph [0030] in full says, “ …The side wall provided in the embodiment of the disclosure is provided with a lifting column 111, and the lifting column 111 is integrally formed with the side wall and is embedded in the side wall. When the lifting column 111 is arranged, the side wall where the lifting column 111 can be arranged can be the side beam 11 of the box body 10 or can be a different structure such as a middle beam of the box body 10 (emphasis added).” Thus, the side wall can be more than one thing. Fig. 2 and 3 shows element 11, but both drawings having the same reference number 11 referring to two different element in both drawings. Fig. 4 shows the lifting column 111, but does not show element 11, which is said to be both side beam and the side wall. The specification discloses the side beam is element 11, but does not include a reference number for the side wall which is an essential element of the claimed battery box. Applicant is kindly requested to make the drawings clearly distinguish between the side beam, side wall and lifting column. Therefore, the previously presented objection to the drawing regarding the side wall is maintained.
As indicated in the objection to the drawing Fig. 4-6 do not clearly show the fixed sealing block. And that is why a simplified two-dimensional drawing of Fig. 4 was requested.
The objection to the drawing that it fails to show a battery pack has been overcome by the cancelation of claim 11. Therefore, the objection to the drawings regarding the battery pack has been withdrawn.
Withdrawal of Claim Rejections
The rejection of Claims 1, 2, 3, 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma (U.S. PG Publication 2022/0363116) has been overcome by the amendment of claim 1. Amended claim 1 recites, “wherein the lifting column is embedded in the side wall, and a top portion of the lifting column is flush with or lower than a top surface of the side wall.”. The applied prior art of Mas does not explicitly disclose, “a top portion of the lifting column is flush with or lower than a top surface of the side wall.”. Therefore, the anticipation rejection under 102(a)(1) has been withdrawn.
Upon further consideration and search the claims are now rejected under 103 over the same reference of Ma.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in this section can be found in the prior Office Action.
Claim 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (U.S. PG Publication 2022/0363116)
Regarding Claim 1 Ma discloses a battery pack case 10 (Fig. 1, paragraph 0009, 0022), considered equivalent to the battery box. The battery pack case, equivalent to the battery box, comprising a bottom plate 101 and a beam 20 (Ma Fig. 1, paragraph 0022), the beam 20 considered equivalent to the side wall, and the bottom plate 101 and the beam 20 encloses a space (Ma Fig. 1), and the battery pack case 10 accommodates the battery (Ma paragraph 0022).
Ma discloses the battery pack case 10 includes a connection column 30 connected to the beam 20 (Ma Fig. 1 to 3, paragraph 0022), the connection column 30 is equivalent to the claimed lifting column, and is integrally formed with the beam 20 that is equivalent to the side wall.
The connection column 30, equivalent to the lifting column, is provided with a protruding portion 303 located on the joint between the connection column (equivalent to the lifting column) and the top portion 203 of the beam 20 (equivalent to the side wall) (Ma Fig. 4, paragraph 0040). The protruding portion 303 is considered equivalent to the fixed sealing block sleeved on the lifting column 30.
The bottom plate 101 is located between the beam 20, considered equivalent to the side wall, and the protruding portion 303, considered equivalent to the fixed sealing block (Ma Fig. 1, 2). The beam 20, considered equivalent to the side wall, is fixedly connected to the bottom plate 101 through the protruding portion 303, considered equivalent to the fixed sealing block, (Ma Fig. 4)
Ma discloses a sealing member 60, considered equivalent to the first sealing member, for sealing a gap between the protruding portion 303 (equivalent to the fixed sealing block) and the bottom plate 101 (Ma Fig. 2). The protruding portion 303, considered equivalent to the fixed sealing block, is sealingly connected to the connection column 30, equivalent to the lifting column, (Ma Fig. 2).
Ma discloses the connection column 30, equivalent to the lifting column, is connected to the beam 20 considered equivalent to the side wall (Ma Fig. 1 to 3, paragraph 0022), and is embedded to it (Ma Fig. 1).
Ma is silent about the top portion of the connection column 30, equivalent to the lifting column, is flush with or lower than a top surface of the side wall. However, making it flush or lower than a top of the sidewall would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill since it constitutes change in the size of the column. According to the MPEP a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV).
Regarding claim 2 and 3 Ma discloses a sealing ring between the connection column 30 and the protruding portion (Ma Fig. 2) the sealing ring is equivalent to the second sealing member, and wherein sealing ring is disposed inside a groove (Ma paragraph 0051).
Regarding Claim 4 Ma discloses a battery pack case 10 (battery pack box) (Fig. 1, paragraph 0009, 0022), as presented above for claim 1, 2 and 3. Ma discloses second fastener 110 is inserted in the second end 302 of the connection column 30 (Ma Fig. 2, paragraph 0049) considered equivalent to the first fastener. Ma, however, is silent about the disclosed fastener passes through the fixed sealing block and the bottom plate and is fixedly connected to the side wall. However, putting a fastener that passes through the fixed sealing block and the bottom plate would have been duplication and rearranging of parts. According to the MPEP duplication of parts or rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is provided (See MPEP 2144.04 VIB.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (U.S. PG Publication 2022/0363116) as presented for claim 1, in view of Wang (U.S. PG Publication 2024/0387926)
The discussion of Ma as applied to claim 1 above is fully incorporated here and is relied upon for the limitation of the claim in this section.
Regarding claim 5 Ma discloses a battery pack case 10 (battery pack box) (Ma Fig. 1, paragraph 0009, 0022), as presented above for claim 1. Ma, however, is silent about the disclosed battery pack case has a bottom guard plate.
Wang discloses in an embodiment a battery pack, including a cell, an upper housing, a lower housing and a bottom guard plate, the upper housing, the lower housing and the bottom guard plate are connected sequentially from top to bottom. (Wang Fig. 1, paragraph 0005, 0006, 0024). Wang discloses the cell or the battery module may be accommodated in an enclosed space enclosed by the upper housing 4, the lower housing and the bottom guard plate 5, so as to be fully protected (Wang paragraph 0024).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have included a bottom guard plate in the battery pack case 10 of Ma (battery pack box) (Ma Fig. 1, paragraph 0009, 0022), for an enhanced protection of the cell or battery module as disclosed by Wang (Wang paragraph 0024). It would have also been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to have included a sealing member between the connection column 30 and the bottom guard plate for enhanced airtightness of the battery pack case (Ma paragraph 0022). According to the MPEP this is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (MPEP 2143 I C).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (U.S. PG Publication 2022/0363116) in view of Wang (U.S. PG Publication 2024/0387926) as presented for claim 1 and 5, and further in view of Zhou Yuan et al. (CN215527858; called CN '858; whose original version and English language translation are filed in the IDS of 07/24/2025)
The discussion of Ma as applied to claim1, and the discussion of Ma and Wang as applied to claim 5 is fully incorporated here and is relied upon for the limitation of the claim in this section.
Regarding claim 6 Ma modified by Wang teaches the battery pack of claim 5 (Ma Fig. 1, paragraph 0009, 0022; Wang paragraph 0024), but fails to teach a surface of the fixed sealing block facing the bottom guard plate is provided with a stepped structure, and a third sealing member is sleeved therein.
CN '858 discloses a battery pack and mounting assembly (CN ‘858 paragraph 0005) having the mounting assembly have a stepped structure with a first sleeve 1 penetrating a second sleeve 3 and extends from the upper cover 10 to the lower cover 20 (CN '858 Fig. 4, paragraph 0007-0011). Furthermore, the mounting assembly comprise sealing elements 5 and the sealing elements are clamped between the first sleeve 1 and the upper cover 10, and between the second sleeve 3 and the bottom plate 20 (CN '858 Fig. 2, paragraph 0013) considered equivalent to the third sealing member. CN '858 discloses the mounting assembly simplifies the mounting assembly, improves mounting efficiency of the mounting assembly and reduces cost (CN '858 paragraph 0004).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the mounting assembly of Ma as modified by Wang by the teaching of CN '858 and used the stepped mounting structure of the mounting assembly of CN '858 for the benefits disclosed (CN '858 paragraph 0004, 0007- 0011). According to the MPEP this is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (MPEP 2143 I C).
Claim 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (U.S. PG Publication 2022/0363116) as presented for claim 1, in view of Zhou Yuan et al. (CN215527858; called CN '858; whose original version and English language translation are filed in the IDS of 07/24/2025)
The discussion of Ma as applied to claim 1 is fully incorporated in here and is applied to the claims in this section.
Regarding claim 7 Ma teaches the battery box of claim 1 (Ma Fig. 1, paragraph 0009, 0022) but fail to teach the connection column 30, equivalent to the lifting column, has a stepped hole for allowing a bolt to pass through, and a stepped surface of the stepped hole is configured to press fit with a nut of the bolt.
CN '858 discloses a battery pack and mounting assembly (CN ‘858 paragraph 0005) having the mounting assembly have a stepped structure with a first sleeve penetrating a second sleeve and extends from the upper cover to the lower cover (CN '858 Fig. 4, paragraph 0007-0011). Furthermore, the mounting assembly of CN '858 has a fastener 4 having a locking cap 41 and a lock lever 42 (CN '858 Fig. 2, 3) considered equivalent to the bolt to pass to the stepped hole and press-with a nut of the bolt. CN '858 discloses the mounting assembly simplifies the mounting assembly, improves mounting efficiency of the mounting assembly and reduces cost (CN '858 paragraph 0004).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the battery box of Ma by the mounting assembly of CN ‘858 having fastener 4 having a locking cap 41 and a lock lever 42 (CN '858 Fig. 2, 3) considered equivalent to the bolt to pass to the stepped hole and press-with a nut of the bolt for the benefit of having a simplified mounting assembly that improves mounting efficiency of the mounting assembly and reduces cost (CN '858 paragraph 0004). According to the MPEP this is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (MPEP 2143 I C).
Regarding claim 8 and 10 the mounting assembly of CN '858 (CN '858 Fig. 2,3, paragraph 0007-0011) discloses a first cylinder 1 and a second cylinder 3 fixedly connected, wherein the diameter of the first cylinder is greater than the diameter of the second cylinder (CN '858 Fig. 3) and has a first hole and a second hole in the first cylinder and second cylinder and the diameter of the first hole is greater than the diameter of the second hole (CN '858 Fig. 2), the first hole is in the first cylinder 1 and the second hole is in the second cylinder (CN '858 Fig. 4). Wang discloses the battery pack has a bottom guard plate (Wang Fig. 1, paragraph 0005, 0006, 0024) as recited in claim 10.
Regarding claim 9 CN '858 is silent about the length of the stepped surface from the bottom plate being 1/3 to 2/3 of the lifting column, i.e. mounting assembly of CN '848. However, finding the optimum length may be achieved by the person of ordinary skill by routine experimentation. According to the MPEP, "Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). (MPEP 2144.05 II A)
Response to Arguments
In the response filed 12/26/2025 applicant has responded to the last non-final Office action dated 11/05/2025. The non-final included an objection to the drawing for failing to show the side wall, the fixed sealing block and a battery pack. Applicant has provided a description of the drawing regarding the side wall and cited the disclosure in the specification paragraph [0030] that the side wall where the lifting column 111 can be arranged can be the side beam 11 of the box body (Remarks page 5-6), thus equating the side beam 11 to the side wall.
The disclosure cited in paragraph [0030] in full says, “ …with the side wall and is embedded in the side wall. When the lifting column 111 is arranged, the side wall where the lifting column 111 can be arranged can be the side beam 11 of the box body 10 or can be a different structure such as a middle beam of the box body 10 (emphasis added).” Thus, the side wall can be more than one thing. Fig. 2 and 3 shows element 11, but both having the same reference 11 refer to two different element in both drawings. Fig. 4 does not show element 11, which is said to be both side beam and the side wall. Applicant is required to show explicitly the side wall is each of the drawings in Fig. 2, 3, and 4. The side wall is an essential part of the claimed battery box, and without a clear indication which element represents the side wall the drawings is lacking in an essential element of the claimed battery box. Examiner also maintain the position that a two-dimensional drawing of elements of Fig. 4 is required to unambiguously show the different elements and their positional relationships.
Therefore, the previously presented objection to the drawing regarding the side wall is maintained.
Applicant also argues that drawing in Fig. 5 and 6 show the fixing sealing block, which is sleeved on the lifting column 111 of Fig. 4.
In view of applicant’s explanation and discussion the objection to the drawing for showing the fixed sealing block has been withdrawn. Applicant has also canceled claim 11 drawn to a battery pack. Therefore, the objection to the drawing that it fails to show a battery pack has been overcome by the cancelation of claim 11. Therefore, the objection to the drawings of the fixed sealing block and the battery back has been withdrawn., while the objection regarding the side wall is maintained.
Regarding the rejection of claim 1, 2, 3, 11 under 102 as being anticipated by Ma et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2022/0363116) applicant traverses the rejection of the claims. Examiner notes that the newly added limitation to claim 1 “… and a top portion of the lifting column is flush with or lower than a top surface of the side wall”, is not disclosed by the reference of Ma, and thus the amendment to the claim overcomes the anticipation rejection. Therefore, the rejection under 102(a)(1) has been withdrawn. Upon further consideration and search the claims are now rejected under 103 over the same reference of Ma.
Applicant also traverses the rejection of the claim and argues that the reference of Ma does not disclose the bottom plate is located between the side wall and the fixed sealing block; and the side wall fixedly connected to the bottom plate through the fixed sealing block ; the first sealing member for sealing a gap between the fixed sealing block and the bottom plate, also traverses the rejection of claim 4, 5, 6, 6-10 (Remarks page 7-8).
Examiner notes that the bottom plate 101 is located between the beam 20, considered equivalent to the side wall, and the protruding portion 303, considered equivalent to the fixed sealing block (Ma Fig,2).
For reasons presented here the combined teaching of the applied references render the claimed invention obvious. The rejection is made final.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR M KEKIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00 pm,.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at 571-272-3433. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OMAR M KEKIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights